W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: response to issue pfps-07

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:57:23 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b0cba671ab7c2a9@[]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org


>  > >
>>  >This change means that the language tag is significant for typed literals.
>>  Can you elaborate on your response? In what way does this make the
>>  language tag 'significant'?
>>  I fail to see how it does. It explicitly and directly ignores the
>>  language tag, by treating any typed literal with a language tag in
>>  exactly the same way as the similar literal without the language tag.
>>  Maybe we have failed to communicate somewhere?
>Under the above semantic constraints "a"@fr^xsd:integer and
>"a"@en^xsd:integer do not necessarily denote the same element of the domain
>of discourse.  Therefore the language tag is significant for typed

Oh, I see. It is significant for *ill-formed* typed literals. OK, I 
can tweak that easily enough. Will do.


>  >
>>  What I should do, obviously, is simply refer to the Concepts doc and
>>  use the terminology there. Then the statement of the condition would
>>  be as follows:
>>  if sss is well-balanced, self-contained XML element content and ttt
>>  is a language identifier [RFC-3066] then
>>  IL("sss"[@ttt]^^rdf:XMLLiteral) is the canonical form of the XML
>>  document corresponding to the pair <sss, ttt>, as defined in [RDF
>>  Concepts]; and otherwise,  IL("sss"[@ttt]^^rdf:XMLLiteral) is not in
>>  LV.
>This is now consistent with RDF Concepts.  However, the treatment in RDF
>Concepts is ridiculous.  Why in the world should the meaning of an RDF XML
>Literal include this wrapper junk?

Take that up with the relevant editors. At this stage I just want to 
get the documents consistent. I am not the XML guy on the WG, I defer 
to others when it comes to the 'best' way to use such a ridiculous 
and barbaric notation; its like asking what is the best kind of wood 
to use to build a suspension bridge.

But obviously I do not speak for the WG here.

IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 14:55:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:20 UTC